Why are Native American burial grounds more important than everybody else's burial grounds? Progress happens, cemeteries close or move. But for some reason, just because it happens to be a "possible" burial ground for Native Americans many hundreds of years ago, we have to toss this idea out?
What proof have they that this area was above sea level centuries ago? I think we have more proof to the contrary. We have proof that the backbay part of Boston was BELOW sea level until they brought in fill to raise it. Did they get the fill from the ancient burial ground and thus lower it below the seal level?
You are describing what we mistakenly refer to as "Native Americans", who ironically, also are not originally from here, but immigrated here from another country legally in accordance with the lack of immigration laws in force at the time.
We also need to fix the plaque at the statue of liberty to say simply "GTFO" instead of the drivel about welcoming tired, poor and huddled masses of people. No. the plaque is still appropriate, we still allow people to come here and apply for immigration. Just because we are becoming increasingly vigilant over people who choose to come here illegally instead of legally does not invalidate the plaque.
Every employer in the state is required to check ID, proof of citizenship, and enter those details into a state validation program that double checks the sanity of those docs...
That is the same but for the details in every state. The problem is that if you just pay them cash and don't pay FICA, unemployment and so forth, then there is no record of them being an employee. Plus you don't have to pay them minimum wage. Who are they going to complain to? Illegal? Absolutely. Do some companies do it? Absolutely.
I don't have a twitter account, a facebook account or a myspace account, but I have a real actual friend that I talk to about once a week who DOES have those accounts, and when we talk face to face he tells me what's going on with our old highschool buddies without all the overhead noise of stuff that nobody cares about.
Well, we shall see. If they lower the cost of their games by a couple of bucks, then I guess they were being green. If not, then they are lying poser a-holes.
Some of those are silly and some aren't, depending how you answer the others. #1 is possible, but the odds of it existing close enough to where it matters make it silly to dwell on it.
#2 follows from #1 except that the chances that some of the life is intelligent cuts down the odds by several orders of magnitude from an already dismally small number.
#3 you have to assume that #1 and #2 are true. But if they are, I would say it is likely that they would try to promote their existence and that they probably also believe there is other intelligent life out there. The folly is that they are very unlikely to promote their existence in the manner that we do.
#4 seems like foolishness to me because of the extremely long odds against intelligent life being close enough to use to be seen via radio wave and also the odds of them actually using radio waves versus some other method of trying to attract attention, or at the very least a fundamental difference in what the believe to be a useful band of frequency.
#5 illustrates my point in #4.
And they are intentionally keeping quiet, because they don't want us coming looking for them.
Nah, it's probably just because radio waves are diluted and scattered in a miniscule distance as far as astronomical distances are concerned.
The existence of Extra Terrestrial life would not invalidate my belief, which happens to be Christianity. The fact that man was made in God's image is not a reference to our physical appearance, as we obviously all look different, and until Jesus came, there was no physical incarnation of God. Jesus also spoke of having sheep in other pastures. Aliens? Maybe. Or perhaps he was speaking of the many other countries on Earth.
C.S. Lewis, a Christian author, had a whole series where there was intelligent life on other planets, even in our solar system, and I don't recall the elders of the Church burning him at the stake.
If we ever do find life on other planets, I think it will be only after we have tossed aside our preconceived notions of what we are looking for. For example, the notion that water is going to be the clue to finding life. Yes, OUR life, and the majority of life on Earth is dependent on water, but the notion that life will only develop on a planet that is Earthlike in that it has liquid water and is approximately the same temperature is extremely limiting. There is evidence that life was all but wiped out on Earth several times, and still came back. Why should we think that that is not possible on a non-Earthlike planet? If we take such a narrow view, then I think that it is indeed highly likely that we are the only life AS WE KNOW IT in the universe.
Is it not a life because it doesn't age?
Life is defined scientifically as the ability to utilize resources to sustain oneself. In most basic terms, that makes it seem like a robot could be considered alive, except that it is completely and utterly dependent upon someone else to supply it that resource, and is not able to go out and forage for resources on its own. Some exceptions sort of barely apply.
20 years for extortion, and how many years for falsifying the need for entry level IT workers? I can name several unemployed people who could easily fit the task of "web development, information technology and software development" mentioned in the article. Specialized skill, yeah right.
Judging by the content of recruiters e-mails that I get, it is not possible to get an IT related job in the United States right now unless you are an H1-B visa holder.
Really, it's amazing Blackboard is still around with two full-featured FOSS competitors in existence. I guess it's just testament to the power of lock-in.
Software companies that charge for their products can afford better salespeople. I'd wager dollars to donuts that most school districts are not even aware of an Open Source alternative. Blackboard calls and says they have software to sell. Open Source doesn't call anybody. Guess who wins? Blackboard. Guess who loses? Everyone who pays taxes.
You had the internet in High School? Luxury! ipconfig hadn't even been invented when I went to high school. It was so early in the computer era that they still thought keyboarding ought to be a prerequisite to a programming class.
In a meat-space meeting, that's not really possibly unless everyone takes laptops along, and what usually happens is I lose interest then suddenly realise when someone does ask me a question that I've not been listening for the past five minutes and have no context.
This is my problem with most meetings that I am in these days. Everybody has a laptop and/or a phone that they are playing with and no one is paying attention. Every question has to be asked twice. It is really annoying and wastes the time of everyone in the meeting.
Maybe, since 99.99% of the problem is with current or ex-employees, they should not advertise the password policy at all. They could check for things like to many consecutive of the same letter, or ascii values increasing by on, or consecutive keyboard letters, and just say "Sorry, I don't like that password. Try another one." When you share the rules with everyone, you help the hacker reduce the options he needs to try.
I was on a government site recently, I can't remember which one. They required that the length of your password be EXACTLY 8 in length, and consist only of letters and numbers. Such a restriction probably reduces by billions of times the amount of effort required to discover the password.
Now let's further pretend that the system is installed in an IT shop where 3 incorrect passwords gets your account locked forcing you to wait 15 minutes before trying to log in again. Now the super-duper-cluster computer might as well be a Z80 processor, since it can only try about 100,000 possibilities a year. Someone could create a billion billion parallel (but necessarily interconnected) universes and spend the entire lifetime of each universe trying to find your password, and still have less than a one percent chance of finding it.
if you actually want to reduce accidents rather than rake in the fines, it would be much better if cities just increased the duration of the yellow.
That would just lead to a feedback cycle as people learn to press their luck with the longer yellow and in order to avoid accidents they have to increase the length of the yellow.
In Oklahoma, you can even be ticketed for failure to yield if you enter the intersection and strike another vehicle which has illegally run a red light. My friend was ticketed for this when he turned left on a green arrow and another car from the other direction ran into him after running a red light.
If you entered when it was green, and were still there when it was red, then you were there for the entire yellow cycle, which is far too long to be in the intersection. One assumes that you did not have a clear path through the intersection, in which case it would be illegal to enter the intersection even if the light was green.
wondering where the public outrage is
I wouldn't be nosing around for public outrage Mr. Daley. People have been ignoring your illegal misuses of power in Chicago for far too long.
A better question would be to ask if they believe that the scientific method is a valid method of seeking the truth.
And the answer is decisively "no". Science can not tell you the truth. it can only produce more and more accurate rules of thumb. The scientific method is a good method for obtaining these rules of thumb, but as soon as the scientific method is abandoned and a rule of thumb is accepted as irrevocable fact, then the scientific method is no longer being practiced, and it has become a belief system.
Slashdot Mirror
Why are Native American burial grounds more important than everybody else's burial grounds? Progress happens, cemeteries close or move. But for some reason, just because it happens to be a "possible" burial ground for Native Americans many hundreds of years ago, we have to toss this idea out?
What proof have they that this area was above sea level centuries ago? I think we have more proof to the contrary. We have proof that the backbay part of Boston was BELOW sea level until they brought in fill to raise it. Did they get the fill from the ancient burial ground and thus lower it below the seal level?
You are describing what we mistakenly refer to as "Native Americans", who ironically, also are not originally from here, but immigrated here from another country legally in accordance with the lack of immigration laws in force at the time.
We also need to fix the plaque at the statue of liberty to say simply "GTFO" instead of the drivel about welcoming tired, poor and huddled masses of people.
No. the plaque is still appropriate, we still allow people to come here and apply for immigration. Just because we are becoming increasingly vigilant over people who choose to come here illegally instead of legally does not invalidate the plaque.
Every employer in the state is required to check ID, proof of citizenship, and enter those details into a state validation program that double checks the sanity of those docs...
That is the same but for the details in every state. The problem is that if you just pay them cash and don't pay FICA, unemployment and so forth, then there is no record of them being an employee. Plus you don't have to pay them minimum wage. Who are they going to complain to? Illegal? Absolutely. Do some companies do it? Absolutely.
'nuff said.
I don't have a twitter account, a facebook account or a myspace account, but I have a real actual friend that I talk to about once a week who DOES have those accounts, and when we talk face to face he tells me what's going on with our old highschool buddies without all the overhead noise of stuff that nobody cares about.
Well, we shall see. If they lower the cost of their games by a couple of bucks, then I guess they were being green. If not, then they are lying poser a-holes.
Some of those are silly and some aren't, depending how you answer the others. #1 is possible, but the odds of it existing close enough to where it matters make it silly to dwell on it.
#2 follows from #1 except that the chances that some of the life is intelligent cuts down the odds by several orders of magnitude from an already dismally small number.
#3 you have to assume that #1 and #2 are true. But if they are, I would say it is likely that they would try to promote their existence and that they probably also believe there is other intelligent life out there. The folly is that they are very unlikely to promote their existence in the manner that we do.
#4 seems like foolishness to me because of the extremely long odds against intelligent life being close enough to use to be seen via radio wave and also the odds of them actually using radio waves versus some other method of trying to attract attention, or at the very least a fundamental difference in what the believe to be a useful band of frequency.
#5 illustrates my point in #4.
And they are intentionally keeping quiet, because they don't want us coming looking for them.
Nah, it's probably just because radio waves are diluted and scattered in a miniscule distance as far as astronomical distances are concerned.
The existence of Extra Terrestrial life would not invalidate my belief, which happens to be Christianity. The fact that man was made in God's image is not a reference to our physical appearance, as we obviously all look different, and until Jesus came, there was no physical incarnation of God. Jesus also spoke of having sheep in other pastures. Aliens? Maybe. Or perhaps he was speaking of the many other countries on Earth.
C.S. Lewis, a Christian author, had a whole series where there was intelligent life on other planets, even in our solar system, and I don't recall the elders of the Church burning him at the stake.
If we ever do find life on other planets, I think it will be only after we have tossed aside our preconceived notions of what we are looking for. For example, the notion that water is going to be the clue to finding life. Yes, OUR life, and the majority of life on Earth is dependent on water, but the notion that life will only develop on a planet that is Earthlike in that it has liquid water and is approximately the same temperature is extremely limiting. There is evidence that life was all but wiped out on Earth several times, and still came back. Why should we think that that is not possible on a non-Earthlike planet? If we take such a narrow view, then I think that it is indeed highly likely that we are the only life AS WE KNOW IT in the universe.
Is it not a life because it doesn't age?
Life is defined scientifically as the ability to utilize resources to sustain oneself. In most basic terms, that makes it seem like a robot could be considered alive, except that it is completely and utterly dependent upon someone else to supply it that resource, and is not able to go out and forage for resources on its own. Some exceptions sort of barely apply.
20 years for extortion, and how many years for falsifying the need for entry level IT workers? I can name several unemployed people who could easily fit the task of "web development, information technology and software development" mentioned in the article. Specialized skill, yeah right.
Judging by the content of recruiters e-mails that I get, it is not possible to get an IT related job in the United States right now unless you are an H1-B visa holder.
Really, it's amazing Blackboard is still around with two full-featured FOSS competitors in existence. I guess it's just testament to the power of lock-in.
Software companies that charge for their products can afford better salespeople. I'd wager dollars to donuts that most school districts are not even aware of an Open Source alternative. Blackboard calls and says they have software to sell. Open Source doesn't call anybody. Guess who wins? Blackboard. Guess who loses? Everyone who pays taxes.
You had the internet in High School? Luxury! ipconfig hadn't even been invented when I went to high school. It was so early in the computer era that they still thought keyboarding ought to be a prerequisite to a programming class.
In a meat-space meeting, that's not really possibly unless everyone takes laptops along, and what usually happens is I lose interest then suddenly realise when someone does ask me a question that I've not been listening for the past five minutes and have no context.
This is my problem with most meetings that I am in these days. Everybody has a laptop and/or a phone that they are playing with and no one is paying attention. Every question has to be asked twice. It is really annoying and wastes the time of everyone in the meeting.
Maybe, since 99.99% of the problem is with current or ex-employees, they should not advertise the password policy at all. They could check for things like to many consecutive of the same letter, or ascii values increasing by on, or consecutive keyboard letters, and just say "Sorry, I don't like that password. Try another one." When you share the rules with everyone, you help the hacker reduce the options he needs to try.
I was on a government site recently, I can't remember which one. They required that the length of your password be EXACTLY 8 in length, and consist only of letters and numbers. Such a restriction probably reduces by billions of times the amount of effort required to discover the password.
Now let's further pretend that the system is installed in an IT shop where 3 incorrect passwords gets your account locked forcing you to wait 15 minutes before trying to log in again. Now the super-duper-cluster computer might as well be a Z80 processor, since it can only try about 100,000 possibilities a year. Someone could create a billion billion parallel (but necessarily interconnected) universes and spend the entire lifetime of each universe trying to find your password, and still have less than a one percent chance of finding it.
Agreed. Twitter is doomed to failure. It can only REFERENCE porn, not actually DISPLAY it.
A vocal minority won't like getting bombarded with ads?
No, a vocal minority will complain about the ads.
Everyone else will just stop using the service.
if you actually want to reduce accidents rather than rake in the fines, it would be much better if cities just increased the duration of the yellow.
That would just lead to a feedback cycle as people learn to press their luck with the longer yellow and in order to avoid accidents they have to increase the length of the yellow.
In Oklahoma, you can even be ticketed for failure to yield if you enter the intersection and strike another vehicle which has illegally run a red light. My friend was ticketed for this when he turned left on a green arrow and another car from the other direction ran into him after running a red light.
If you entered when it was green, and were still there when it was red, then you were there for the entire yellow cycle, which is far too long to be in the intersection. One assumes that you did not have a clear path through the intersection, in which case it would be illegal to enter the intersection even if the light was green.
wondering where the public outrage is
I wouldn't be nosing around for public outrage Mr. Daley. People have been ignoring your illegal misuses of power in Chicago for far too long.
A better question would be to ask if they believe that the scientific method is a valid method of seeking the truth.
And the answer is decisively "no". Science can not tell you the truth. it can only produce more and more accurate rules of thumb. The scientific method is a good method for obtaining these rules of thumb, but as soon as the scientific method is abandoned and a rule of thumb is accepted as irrevocable fact, then the scientific method is no longer being practiced, and it has become a belief system.